When dual citizenship becomes conflict of interest

[Picaro]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

you wax psychotic. No question---the donkey is RECENTLY pixilated and jews are abandoning it in droves ------------however
"vote to ethnically cleanse DA EVUL WHITE CHRISTIANS" huh------show me. AS to the genocide of Israelis----
that trend does infect the recently pixilated donkey-----but, in the past----was a very WASPY elephant thing---------try to keep up

Show you? go watch the 'Debates' the Democrats held; every single candidate fell all over themselves assuring the La Raza mobs they were behind flooding the country with their fellow criminal illegal aliens. They need to get rid of ******, same as you and your Chasidic racists need to get rid of them.

 

[Picaro]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all.

Oh quit lying; I never said a thing about deporting Americans; traitors and racists, like Democrats, definitely need to go, and the Founders chose deportation as the preferred method, and Lincoln liked it as well.

Are you afraid of ending up surrounded by non-white people, like most armchair radicals and 'Social Justice Warriors' are? Think of all the wonderful changes your ilk can achieve in shitholes like Somalia and Venezuela if you were get shipped there. I'm sure they would be suitably impressed with your politics and tactics.

 

[Picaro]

And when they don't even know that they have dual citizenship?
Seriously if they are that much i the dark they should not hold any political office.

LOL- too scared to even address the fact that it would take a Constitutional amendment to do what you suggest?

Explain your thoughts on why it wold take a Constitutional amendment to implement it

It wouldn't take an Amendment, and in fact there used to be a law on the books about voting in a foreign election counted as forfeiting your U.S. citizenship. It was repealed in 1967, for some reason I haven't looked into yet. Afroyim v. Rusk ...

Afroyim v. Rusk - Wikipedia

Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that citizens of the United States may not be deprived of their citizenship involuntarily.[1][2][3] The U.S. government had attempted to revoke the citizenship of Beys Afroyim, a man born in Poland, because he had cast a vote in an Israeli election after becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen. The Supreme Court decided that Afroyim's right to retain his citizenship was guaranteed by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. In so doing, the Court struck down a federal law mandating loss of U.S. citizenship for voting in a foreign election—thereby overruling one of its own precedents, Perez v. Brownell (1958), in which it had upheld loss of citizenship under similar circumstances less than a decade earlier.

The Afroyim decision opened the way for a wider acceptance of dual (or multiple) citizenship in United States law.[4] The Bancroft Treaties—a series of agreements between the United States and other nations which had sought to limit dual citizenship following naturalization—were eventually abandoned after the Carter administration concluded that Afroyim and other Supreme Court decisions had rendered them unenforceable.

The impact of Afroyim v. Rusk was narrowed by a later case, Rogers v. Bellei (1971), in which the Court determined that the Fourteenth Amendment safeguarded citizenship only when a person was born or naturalized in the United States, and that Congress retained authority to regulate the citizenship status of a person who was born outside the United States to an American parent. However, the specific law at issue in Rogers v. Bellei—a requirement for a minimum period of U.S. residence that Bellei had failed to satisfy—was repealed by Congress in 1978. As a consequence of revised policies adopted in 1990 by the United States Department of State, it is now (in the words of one expert) "virtually impossible to lose American citizenship without formally and expressly renouncing it."[5]

... Muslims sniveling bout DA JOOOOS!!! are most of the problem:


While acknowledging that "American citizenship enjoys strong protection against loss under Afroyim and Terrazas", retired journalist Henry S. Matteo[89] suggested, "It would have been more equitable ... had the Supreme Court relied on the Eighth Amendment, which adds a moral tone as well as a firmer constitutional basis, than the Fourteenth." Matteo also said, "Under Afroyim there is a lack of balance between rights and protections on one hand, and obligations and responsibilities on the other, all four elements of which have been an integral part of the concept of citizenship, as history shows."[90] Political scientist P. Allan Dionisopoulos wrote that "it is doubtful that any [Supreme Court decision] created a more complex problem for the United States than Afroyim v. Rusk", a decision which he believed had "since become a source of embarrassment for the United States in its relationships with the Arab world" because of the way it facilitated dual U.S.–Israeli citizenship and participation by Americans in Israel's armed forces.[91]

After his Supreme Court victory, Afroyim divided his time between West Brighton (Staten Island, New York) and the Israeli city of Safed until his death on May 19, 1984, in West Brighton.[92][93]

Personally I wouldn't have let Afroyim into the U.S. at all, and the same for Muslims; both have a violent ideology fit only for sociopaths.

Still would require a Constitutional Amendment.

Nah. That's just nonsense left wingers try and foist on us. All it takes is a SC made up of sane Justices, is all.

I get the concern- but if it is important to you- then you should be working on that Constitutional Amendment.

It's not important to me, it's important to traitors, fifth columnist radical Muslims, assorted antisemites, and left winger tards. You can't read well, as usual. Lay off the bong and the meth. I'm fine with just deporting those who are unhappy here somewhere they will feel needed and fit in better, is all. Makes zero difference to me why they're unhappy or who they are, if they hate the place then kick them out.

 

[irosie91]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

you wax psychotic. No question---the donkey is RECENTLY pixilated and jews are abandoning it in droves ------------however
"vote to ethnically cleanse DA EVUL WHITE CHRISTIANS" huh------show me. AS to the genocide of Israelis----
that trend does infect the recently pixilated donkey-----but, in the past----was a very WASPY elephant thing---------try to keep up

Show you? go watch the 'Debates' the Democrats held; every single candidate fell all over themselves assuring the La Raza mobs they were behind flooding the country with their fellow criminal illegal aliens. They need to get rid of ******, same as you and your Chasidic racists need to get rid of them.

I am fascinated. I missed it. Pigaro states that Democrats said "LA RAZA
THUGS ---I am all for flooding the USA with your Fellow LA RAZA THUGS"-----
-----and that the representative Democrats were Chassidic persons who are
all ---like me----"racists" Anyone out there see these particular debates?
I have known lots of "Chassidic" persons--------of all their foibles---I have never
noted any particular tendency towards "racism" (I also missed the "address
to La Raza thugs)

 

[Syriusly]

And when they don't even know that they have dual citizenship?
Seriously if they are that much i the dark they should not hold any political office.

LOL- too scared to even address the fact that it would take a Constitutional amendment to do what you suggest?

Explain your thoughts on why it wold take a Constitutional amendment to implement it

It wouldn't take an Amendment, and in fact there used to be a law on the books about voting in a foreign election counted as forfeiting your U.S. citizenship. It was repealed in 1967, for some reason I haven't looked into yet. Afroyim v. Rusk ...

Afroyim v. Rusk - Wikipedia

Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that citizens of the United States may not be deprived of their citizenship involuntarily.[1][2][3] The U.S. government had attempted to revoke the citizenship of Beys Afroyim, a man born in Poland, because he had cast a vote in an Israeli election after becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen. The Supreme Court decided that Afroyim's right to retain his citizenship was guaranteed by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. In so doing, the Court struck down a federal law mandating loss of U.S. citizenship for voting in a foreign election—thereby overruling one of its own precedents, Perez v. Brownell (1958), in which it had upheld loss of citizenship under similar circumstances less than a decade earlier.

The Afroyim decision opened the way for a wider acceptance of dual (or multiple) citizenship in United States law.[4] The Bancroft Treaties—a series of agreements between the United States and other nations which had sought to limit dual citizenship following naturalization—were eventually abandoned after the Carter administration concluded that Afroyim and other Supreme Court decisions had rendered them unenforceable.

The impact of Afroyim v. Rusk was narrowed by a later case, Rogers v. Bellei (1971), in which the Court determined that the Fourteenth Amendment safeguarded citizenship only when a person was born or naturalized in the United States, and that Congress retained authority to regulate the citizenship status of a person who was born outside the United States to an American parent. However, the specific law at issue in Rogers v. Bellei—a requirement for a minimum period of U.S. residence that Bellei had failed to satisfy—was repealed by Congress in 1978. As a consequence of revised policies adopted in 1990 by the United States Department of State, it is now (in the words of one expert) "virtually impossible to lose American citizenship without formally and expressly renouncing it."[5]

... Muslims sniveling bout DA JOOOOS!!! are most of the problem:


While acknowledging that "American citizenship enjoys strong protection against loss under Afroyim and Terrazas", retired journalist Henry S. Matteo[89] suggested, "It would have been more equitable ... had the Supreme Court relied on the Eighth Amendment, which adds a moral tone as well as a firmer constitutional basis, than the Fourteenth." Matteo also said, "Under Afroyim there is a lack of balance between rights and protections on one hand, and obligations and responsibilities on the other, all four elements of which have been an integral part of the concept of citizenship, as history shows."[90] Political scientist P. Allan Dionisopoulos wrote that "it is doubtful that any [Supreme Court decision] created a more complex problem for the United States than Afroyim v. Rusk", a decision which he believed had "since become a source of embarrassment for the United States in its relationships with the Arab world" because of the way it facilitated dual U.S.–Israeli citizenship and participation by Americans in Israel's armed forces.[91]

After his Supreme Court victory, Afroyim divided his time between West Brighton (Staten Island, New York) and the Israeli city of Safed until his death on May 19, 1984, in West Brighton.[92][93]

Personally I wouldn't have let Afroyim into the U.S. at all, and the same for Muslims; both have a violent ideology fit only for sociopaths.

Still would require a Constitutional Amendment.

Nah. That's just nonsense left wingers try and foist on us. All it takes is a SC made up of sane Justices, is all.

I get the concern- but if it is important to you- then you should be working on that Constitutional Amendment.

It's not important to me, it's important to traitors, fifth columnist radical Muslims, assorted antisemites, and left winger tards. You can't read well, as usual. Lay off the bong and the meth. I'm fine with just deporting those who are unhappy here somewhere they will feel needed and fit in better, is all. Makes zero difference to me why they're unhappy or who they are, if they hate the place then kick them out.

Of course you are okay with ignoring the Constitution when the Constitution gets in the way of your agenda of getting rid of Americans who are blacks and Jews.

 

[Syriusly]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all.

Oh quit lying; I never said a thing about deporting Americans; traitors and racists, like Democrats, definitely need to go, and the Founders chose deportation as the preferred method, and Lincoln liked it as well.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all

 

[Desperado]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all.

Oh quit lying; I never said a thing about deporting Americans; traitors and racists, like Democrats, definitely need to go, and the Founders chose deportation as the preferred method, and Lincoln liked it as well.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all

Let's stop with all the BS about deporting all African Americans and Jewish Americans that was not in this thread and you are taking it off topic.
My question i why do you object to not allowing Dual Citizens to hold public office or security clearance? Why do you feel you have the right to put America in danger?

 

[irosie91]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all.

Oh quit lying; I never said a thing about deporting Americans; traitors and racists, like Democrats, definitely need to go, and the Founders chose deportation as the preferred method, and Lincoln liked it as well.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all

Let's stop with all the BS about deporting all African Americans and Jewish Americans that was not in this thread and you are taking it off topic.
My question i why do you object to not allowing Dual Citizens to hold public office or security clearance? Why do you feel you have the right to put America in danger?

are there "dual citizens" with who hold public office or have security
clearance? Can you name some?

 

[22lcidw]

There is also another dual citizenship. The elite citizenship when ruling and the peasant citizenship when running for reelection. They are our buddies then.

 

[Jitss617]

Why should any immigrant have an advantage over me in language and duel citizenship

 

[irosie91]

Why should any immigrant have an advantage over me in language and duel citizenship

they have an advantage over you if they know that in THE ENGLISH
LANGUAGE a "DUEL" is a sword fight. "Immigrant" is not a necessary
qualification for DUAL citizenship. A person can be an Irish citizen if he
can trace ancestry (I am not sure how far back) to Ireland.

 

[Desperado]

And when they don't even know that they have dual citizenship?
Seriously if they are that much i the dark they should not hold any political office.

LOL- too scared to even address the fact that it would take a Constitutional amendment to do what you suggest?

Explain your thoughts on why it wold take a Constitutional amendment to implement it

The Constitution lays out the requirements to be a Congressman , Senator or President. The only way to add more requirements would be through a Constitutional amendment.

Article 1
2: No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

3: No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

Article 2
5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Not so fast,
There is a work around that could do the job. Since all Members of congress are required to have a security clearance, you simply change the requirements for that security clearance and stipulate no person holding dual citizenship shall qualify for the clearance.

 

[Desperado]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all.

Oh quit lying; I never said a thing about deporting Americans; traitors and racists, like Democrats, definitely need to go, and the Founders chose deportation as the preferred method, and Lincoln liked it as well.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all

Let's stop with all the BS about deporting all African Americans and Jewish Americans that was not in this thread and you are taking it off topic.
My question i why do you object to not allowing Dual Citizens to hold public office or security clearance? Why do you feel you have the right to put America in danger?

are there "dual citizens" with who hold public office or have security
clearance? Can you name some?

Im not doing that again only to get this thread closed like the last one. You have Google give it your best shot, but be careful when you post it, you will get called Anti-Semitic and a jew hater

 

[Syriusly]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all.

Oh quit lying; I never said a thing about deporting Americans; traitors and racists, like Democrats, definitely need to go, and the Founders chose deportation as the preferred method, and Lincoln liked it as well.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all

Let's stop with all the BS about deporting all African Americans and Jewish Americans that was not in this thread and you are taking it off topic.
My question i why do you object to not allowing Dual Citizens to hold public office or security clearance? Why do you feel you have the right to put America in danger?

I will be glad to stop pointing out that Picaro is advocating deporting African Americans and Jewish Americans when he stops making that suggestion.

As far your question- two part answer:
a) For Federal office you need to change the Constitution to add additional requirements to prevent dual citizenship. Remember- its not like the Founding Fathers were not aware of the potential conflicts of interests when they wrote the Constitution- they addressed their concern with the natural born citizen requirement for President- but declined to put in further restrictions.
b) You haven't proven that politicians who have dual citizenship put America in danger- at all. You have proclaimed your opinion that they do- yet dozens- perhaps hundreds of Congressman and Senators have held office while not being aware that technically they might also be considered a citizen of Ireland or Israel or Germany or Cuba. Nor have you proven that any of our many military people with either dual citizenship- or even foreign citizenship have put America in danger.

Finally- my question to you:
Why would you want to give any country the ability- the power- to automatically disqualify any sitting President by simply announcing that President Trump is now a citizen of Cuba?

 

[Syriusly]

Why should any immigrant have an advantage over me in language and duel citizenship

Yeah- why should any immigrant speak more languages than you?

And why should they have the advantages of 'duel citizenship'- look what happened to Hamilton!

 

[Syriusly]

And when they don't even know that they have dual citizenship?
Seriously if they are that much i the dark they should not hold any political office.

LOL- too scared to even address the fact that it would take a Constitutional amendment to do what you suggest?

Explain your thoughts on why it wold take a Constitutional amendment to implement it

The Constitution lays out the requirements to be a Congressman , Senator or President. The only way to add more requirements would be through a Constitutional amendment.

Article 1
2: No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

3: No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

Article 2
5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Not so fast,
There is a work around that could do the job. Since all Members of congress are required to have a security clearance, you simply change the requirements for that security clearance and stipulate no person holding dual citizenship shall qualify for the clearance.

Where does the Constitution say that members of Congress are required to have security clearances?

 

[Desperado]

As far your question- two part answer:
a) For Federal office you need to change the Constitution to add additional requirements to prevent dual citizenship. Remember- its not like the Founding Fathers were not aware of the potential conflicts of interests when they wrote the Constitution- they addressed their concern with the natural born citizen requirement for President- but declined to put in further restrictions.
b) You haven't proven that politicians who have dual citizenship put America in danger- at all. You have proclaimed your opinion that they do- yet dozens- perhaps hundreds of Congressman and Senators have held office while not being aware that technically they might also be considered a citizen of Ireland or Israel or Germany or Cuba. Nor have you proven that any of our many military people with either dual citizenship- or even foreign citizenship have put America in danger.

Latest example: the traitor Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who thought he was more important than the President

Finally- my question to you:
Why would you want to give any country the ability- the power- to automatically disqualify any sitting President by simply announcing that President Trump is now a citizen of Cuba?

Because that is not how it works,,, it is even a stupid thought.
The perceived inflicted citizenship would have to be recognized first.

 

[Syriusly]

As far your question- two part answer:
a) For Federal office you need to change the Constitution to add additional requirements to prevent dual citizenship. Remember- its not like the Founding Fathers were not aware of the potential conflicts of interests when they wrote the Constitution- they addressed their concern with the natural born citizen requirement for President- but declined to put in further restrictions.
b) You haven't proven that politicians who have dual citizenship put America in danger- at all. You have proclaimed your opinion that they do- yet dozens- perhaps hundreds of Congressman and Senators have held office while not being aware that technically they might also be considered a citizen of Ireland or Israel or Germany or Cuba. Nor have you proven that any of our many military people with either dual citizenship- or even foreign citizenship have put America in danger.

Latest example: the traitor Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who thought he was more important than the President

Sigh. God why do you Trumpettes despise the Constitution so much? The Constitution spells out exactly what treason is. For you to claim that Vindman is a traitor just really displays your complete ignorance of the Constitution- and of course your blind partisanship.

 

[Syriusly]

As far your question- two part answer:
a) For Federal office you need to change the Constitution to add additional requirements to prevent dual citizenship. Remember- its not like the Founding Fathers were not aware of the potential conflicts of interests when they wrote the Constitution- they addressed their concern with the natural born citizen requirement for President- but declined to put in further restrictions.
b) You haven't proven that politicians who have dual citizenship put America in danger- at all. You have proclaimed your opinion that they do- yet dozens- perhaps hundreds of Congressman and Senators have held office while not being aware that technically they might also be considered a citizen of Ireland or Israel or Germany or Cuba. Nor have you proven that any of our many military people with either dual citizenship- or even foreign citizenship have put America in danger.

Latest example: the traitor Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who thought he was more important than the President

Finally- my question to you:
Why would you want to give any country the ability- the power- to automatically disqualify any sitting President by simply announcing that President Trump is now a citizen of Cuba?

Because that is not how it works,,, it is even a stupid thought.
The perceived inflicted citizenship would have to be recognized first.

Recognized by whom? How?

Who recognizes the 'dual citizenship' of all of the Jewish Americans the original hit list you posted named?

 

[Picaro]

After looking at the list of Jews who allegedly have 'dual citizenship', they are mostly Democrats, ironically the very self-hating 'liberals' who routinely vote to genocide Israelis out of existence but still like to vote to ethnically cleanse Da Evul White Protestants!!!' from the U.S., i.e. they're mostly insane retarded sociopaths and deviants, so maybe a loyalty oath is indeed a good thing. I have no problem at all with deporting Democrats, so these traitors can be shipped out with the rest, no need to snivel because of their ethnicity in this case.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all.

Oh quit lying; I never said a thing about deporting Americans; traitors and racists, like Democrats, definitely need to go, and the Founders chose deportation as the preferred method, and Lincoln liked it as well.

So basically you want to deport the half of Americans you disagree with.

Basically you want to deport 90% of African Americans and 70% of Jewish Americans.

And that is no surprise at all

So basically you have nothing as usual, but have to post last, no matter how dumb your responses get.